Wm. Donovan Steamship Co. v. The S.S. Hellen

Wm. Donovan Steamship Co. v. The S.S. Hellen

Majority held Hellen was the overtaking vessel and bore the burden to keep out of the way (Art.24); on the evidence Hellen failed to satisfy that burden and thus cannot avoid liability, but the Donovan also failed good seamanship by not giving more sea-room after signalling and so fault is apportioned equally; trial judgment finding equal fault is restored.

Citation
[1926] SCR 627
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Wm. Donovan Steamship Co. (Incorporated); Respondent/defendant: The SS. Hellen
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 October 1926
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Collision (shipping) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (on Facts and Law)
Legal Topics
Collision at Sea/river, Duty of Overtaking Vessel, Duty of Overtaken Vessel to Keep Course, Interpretation of Navigation Laws and Pilot Regulations (inland Waters, US Pacific Coast), Apportionment of Fault
Source Language
English
Maritime Law Admiralty Tort/negligence Transportation Law Statutory Navigation Regulations Collision at Sea/river Duty of Overtaking Vessel Duty of Overtaken Vessel to Keep Course +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wm. Donovan Steamship Co. (Incorporated)

Appellant/plaintiff

The SS. Hellen

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Collision (shipping) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (on Facts and Law)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the overtaking vessel (Hellen) failed in the absolute duty to keep out of the way of the overtaken vessel (Wm. Donovan) under the applicable inland navigation rules
  2. 2 Whether the Wm. Donovan materially altered or crowded the course of the Hellen after assenting to the passage, thereby shifting or sharing liability
  3. 3 Interpretation and application of Arts.18,21,23,24,25 of the Navigation Laws and Pilot Regulations for Inland Waters (US Pacific Coast)

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held Hellen was the overtaking vessel and bore the burden to keep out of the way (Art.24); on the evidence Hellen failed to satisfy that burden and thus cannot avoid liability, but the Donovan also failed good seamanship by not giving more sea-room after signalling and so fault is apportioned equally; trial judgment finding equal fault is restored.